Elements of architecture - What is architecture?

There are many different opinions on what constitutes architecture. Everyone will have a different answer to this complex question. Is architecture confined to building? Is art architecture? Is architecture art? Over the years our opinions towards architecture have changed, for example, the ancient Greeks would have had a different view on architecture from the Victorians. There is no definitive answer to this question but instead a combination of views. Through looking at these different views and opinions on ‘what is architecture?’ we can determine our own opinion.

Some people believe that architecture is solely about performing a function. A school should function as a school and a hospital should function as a hospital. What you must ask yourself is, is that really enough to be architecture. Many buildings perfectly perform their function but does that make them good buildings or great architecture? Or somewhere in-between? Almost all of the greatest architectural thinkers have believed architecture to be more than this. Even Mies van der Rohe who appeared to strictly follow Louis Sullivan’s “form ever follows function” of thinking was in fact searching for more than this. By uniting all building forms he sought to create a universal style, a perfectly formed world Cologne Cathedral where architecture wasn’t a concern, it never caused problems, architecture would serve mankind perfectly, silently and universally. So even Mies wanted to create more than mere buildings, he wanted to create spaces in which a new society could thrive. Sometimes the function of a building is to create more than just a building. Cathedrals are intended to bring people closer to god. The are meant to lift you, they draw your eye upwards with diffused light and bring in the beauty of the world with stained glass, glowing images of utopias. This is the function of the building but it is about far more than creating a volume in which things can happen.

Some people also believe that architecture is about materials. Van der Rohe became an architect who was very particular about his materials. Most noticeably in his Barcelona Pavillion where he used exquisite slabs of marble. It seems the case that most architects believe that architecture is about a lot more than just building, but respecting your materials is a very important aspect of the way in which many architects choose to design. Louis I. Kahn is famous for his use of brickwork. He once said “you have to listen to the material and ask it what it wants, a brick will tell you it wants an arch, you tell it you can use a concrete lintel, the brick will tell you it wants an arch” he refered to this as ‘the nature of the material’. It seems that the relationship between an architect and his material is the same as the between an artist and his medium, regardless of what you wish to produce, you must understand the nature of your medium.

Finally, there are the people who believe architecture is about far more than buildings. Many great architects, especially since the early 20th century, believed that architecture con mean so much more than just buildings to fit purposes. An early example of this would be Le Corbusier. He believed that a building should be a journey. He also created his famous ‘five points of architecture’. This is a perfect example about the shift of thinking in the early 20th century. Corbusier did more than just design buildings, he made theories about them, he created a style and he broke new ground. This daring innovation set the trend for many architects to follow, no longer would they look to the past for inspiration they would try to create something new. After this point architecture could be anything. Architects could write poetry in their buildings. They sought to create emotion, depth and imagery in their buildings in a way that had never been done before.

One architect whose work was vastly beyond mere buildings was Louis I. Kahn who is widely regarded as one of, if not the, most influential American architect in the second half of the 20th century. Not only were his buildings functional and bold but they were unique and era defining. Kahn’s buildings redefined architecture. He took his inspirations from classical ideas of forms and old Scottish castles and created buildings that expressed geometric patterns and light in a completely new way. Kahn said “when you decide on the structure you’re deciding on light”, this was in reference to the way in which classical columns interrupted light. When criticising post-war architecture in America he stated “Classical allusions were there in abundance, classical Principles were almost entirely lacking” showing that many architects never truly understood the idea behind the classical forms, Kahn could be said to be classical in his thinking but revolutionary in his execution of those thoughts. He was an architect that knew about the past, so didn’t have to borrow from it.

Following in the footsteps of Louis Kahn 20 years after his death was Daniel Libeskind. Libeskind’s level of theory behind his buildings is something new to architecture. I wont go into the metaphors of his buildings but it’s fair to say that he is looking at architecture in a way that is entirely new. As the conclusion to his book, Daniel Libeskind wrote “If designed well and right, these seemingly hard and inert structures have the power to illuminate and even to heal. … You have to believe.”. This depth to architecture, this extra level of thought, passion and emotion is something which many modern architects are keen to embrace. One of my favourite comments that I have read by Libeskind is that painters, sculptors and writers can all be pessimists but as an architect you must be an optimist, you must believe that you can make something great. A new generation of architects are now developing with this optimistic view.

Architecture has definitions in every dictionary and many people will try to tell you what it means but in the end you must make your own decision and find what you believe it to be.